Nailed to the Wall Ohio uncappers face legal nightmare Thursday Nov 21 2002 18:31 EDT Ohio police this past summer shocked broadband users nationwide by engaging in an unprecedented and frighteningly severe crackdown of area customers who had uncapped their cable modems. In conjunction with the FBI, 17 Buckeye cable users were served warrants, seven of whom had their possessions taken, face fifth-degree felony charges (punishable by up to one year in prison), and have had their lives changed forever. For the record, uncapping ( hacking your modem in order to gain access to untapped bandwidth) is not legal. Those who perform the practice can expect retaliation from their broadband provider, and should expect serious repercussions for doing so. That said, one Ohio ISP has taken punishment for the practice to an unprecedented level that should raise the eyebrows of providers, customers, and concerned citizens alike. The Block family is the Rupert Murdoch of Toledo, Ohio. The company controls several major area newspapers (including The Toledo Blade), one of the area's television stations (TV5 Toledo), a dial up provider, Buckeye Cable, and much more. As such, their control over the political system in the area is considerable, a fact that may under-ride the horrifying journey several individuals are taking through the area's legal gauntlet because they uncapped their cable modems. Paul Shryock, vice president of information technology at Buckeye Cablesystem, discovered that twenty three of his subscribers were getting more juice from their connections than they paid for. According to an interview in a recent Cable World article, Shyrock noted that one subscriber had "altered his modem to handle 100 megabits per second, up and downstream", though the company could never realistically even obtain such speeds. Shryock also confirmed the company wasn't sure how customers were getting the extra speed. "We don't fully understand how they're pulling this off just yet, but we're learning more every day." While the methods Shryock used to discover the offenders who weren't going download crazy is somewhat of a mystery, a greater mystery is how Shyrock came up with the cost impact numbers he would later use to nail subscribers to the wall with the help of the FBI. The FBI's computer crime department needs computer offenses to total over 250,000 dollars before they'll get involved in local crimes. Conveniently for Buckeye cable, Shryock "guesstimated" that the 23 total offenders contributed to more than that amount in bandwidth theft, nearly eleven thousand dollars worth of bandwidth theft per offender. Instead of disconnecting service for uncapping (as is the case with nearly every provider in the U.S.) Buckeye Cablesystem decided to get the FBI involved. Of the 23 who were to be served search warrants, 17 actually received visits from the FBI and local law enforcement. Seven actually found themselves indicted by the local grand jury and currently face fifth degree felony charges. One of several defendants we spoke to places his estimated lost income and hardware at over half a million dollars. Brandon Wirtz, who operates more than one business out of his home, was on the verge of releasing a Smartcard based DRM solution for Windows Media Player to several different companies before his life was turned upside-down. Wirtz is a respected young writer, consultant and tech wiz in the industry, and In April will be Awarded a Microsoft MVP award for his involvement in the Windows Media Community. Thanks to local construction, Wirtz, who never signed a contract with Buckeye, claims his broadband connection was incapable of achieving speeds higher than 128kbps down. By utilizing a Cisco configuration file, he uncapped his Motorola Surfboard modem to 2.5MBps, for what he estimates was no more than a total of 16 hours, and only when he needed to move large files. The worst that could happen to him, he figured, was that his ISP got angry and disconnected his service. He couldn't have been more wrong. It wasn't long before twelve plain-clothed officers greeted Wirtz at his front door with a search warrant and a smile, coyly asking "Is there anything interesting about your cable?" The officers wound up taking every computer in the house, ironically excluding the PC in his living room that actually installed the uncapping software. Wirtz and his roommate lost at least 8 PC's total, even those who were behind firewalls and incapable of benefitting from the uncapped modem. Law enforcement confiscated all of the hardware from the companies Wirtz built, which contained his work, client contacts, and a book he had written. Wirtz even lost his VCR in the deal, and Sylvania Township police debated confiscating his Xbox gaming console, but decided to leave it behind. The officers confiscated his legitimate CD copies of Windows Office and several operating systems, all of his burned CD's, and a security card writing machine instead. Wirtz and several others now face a December 13 court date to determine if they qualify for "diversions", a twelve step program for non-sexual criminal offenders. If Wirtz passes a series of background and substance abuse checks, he may be qualified to pay $3400 in fines and have his record wiped clean if he attends the program. His possessions, client contact information and computers may never be returned, and Wirtz finds himself in a serious financial hole thanks to frightened clients and mounting legal fees, though he's yet to give up on broadband. He's now a happy Wi-Fi customer. John Weglian, chief of the special units division of the prosecutor’s office, offers no apologies for Buckeye's unusually harsh treatment of the uncappers. "Cyber crime is potentially very damaging to society. We are taking a firm position on that type of criminal activity. We hope these cases will have a deterrent value, given the cost factors for the defendants in successful prosecutions." But not everyone in the region agrees that the case is entirely about bandwidth theft. George Runner, among those indicted by the grand jury, has had a long history of disagreement with area officials, the Block family included. Runner, a former Lucas County assistant prosecutor, left the area after being accused of stealing county supplies, an act which was caught on videotape by a hidden camera. That camera, which was illegally placed, forced the resignation of village police chief Lance Martin, and added fuel to the fire of disagreement between Runner and regional officials. According to area locals, the Block family patriarch Paul Block had always disliked George Runner, who the Blocks claimed was overly secretive of details in cases he was prosecuting for the county. Runner will most likely not be offered the chance to attend the diversions program, and was one of the only offenders forced through booking (mugshots, fingerprints). While it's pure speculation to link Runner's legal problems with his area disagreements, it's something that begs asking. Calls to Runner's attorney's office for comment were not returned by press time. When the Block family first came to Toledo, Paul Block was rumored to have said he was going to "rip down Toledo and rebuild it in his image". The behavior of Buckeye Cablesystem has many wondering exactly what kind of image he had in mind. |
 | |
Successful prosecution?No, there was no successful prosecution. All that happened is Buckeye managed to up the ante high enough (to prison rape and felony records) that the defendants are looking to fold. A successful prosecution would involve guilty verdicts. | |
|  |  mitska join:2001-12-25 Sarasota, FL |
mitska
Member
2002-Nov-22 1:46 am
Re: Successful prosecution?I do wish that a defense attorney with even a tad of ethics and morals(possible?) would take this case on and totally own that idiot company...a good start would be changing the venue and doing some serious investigation on some of the b.s. claims being made...250,000 dollars lost? FBI agents raiding civilians homes over misdemeanors? what a bunch of crap, names, address and photos in the local paper(also owned by cable co)?...food for thought for sure. Granted I don't think what they did was right in uncapping...but one little screwup should not mean your life comes to a crashing halt at gunpoint in this country of all places or the war on crime/terrorism is lost before it even started. This is supposed to be the land of opportunity...not the land of opportunity unless you screw up once in a very minor way. That guy who lost all that computer gear and business equipment for example...I rank that as on par with the old tradition of chopping a thiefs hands off even if all he stole with a loaf of bread...I swear sometimes I think we are regressing in some ways and it really irritates me. | |
|  |  |  | |
Re: Successful prosecution?Any ethical defense attorney would encourage his clients to plead down to a lesser offense, or take the stupid "diversion" program -- even if no law was broken. That's the way the "justice" system works nowadays -- the persecution can make the consequences so high (prison rape and felony records -- the latter basically means you'll never make an honest living again) for losing that even a 100% innocent person doesn't dare defend himself. For someone who did something which could be twisted into actually fitting the charges, there's no choice at all. | |
|
 |  | |
to russotto
I used to own a 55mbit DS-3 line when I hosted websites back in the day when it was easy to do, It cost me $25k to install and with full bandwidth usage, about $4k/mo multiplied by 23 at 55mbit each thats $92k/mo.
Hmm... so even at 3 months thats $276k in so called bandwidth usage. But, not everyone was connected at 55mbits/sec. I doubt if that was even possible through a teeny tiny cable modem. 10mbit max. So estimate 10mbit into 55mbit comes out to about 5. Divide $267k by 5 you get $55.2k per quarter in bandwidth usage for 23 people at a solid 10mit/sec. A total of $220k/year.
So, these guys had a year to get their crap in gear. Sounds to me like they waited for it to escalate to a point where they could claim these losses and then involve the FBI. | |
|  |  | |
falloutboiii to russotto
Anon
2002-Nov-22 3:11 am
to russotto
jeeeesus people get so corrupt sometimes. it's crayzay.
freakin corrupt people =\ | |
|  |  Sikki join:2000-09-19 Moosup, CT |
to russotto
First off the losers who uncapped their modems did so KNOWING it was against the TOS. Whether they knew it was against the law or not is up for debate. However knowing that what they were doing was wrong should have been the first clue that their actions COULD lead them to further trouble. I don't feel the least bit sorry for them in the fact they are arrested and also had all their equipment taken from them. I know in some states if you use a car in the commission of a crime it is taken from you and you don't get it back. Seeing as how this was felony charges on them, it is my guess that is why they lost their stuff.
Too many people are always feeling sad for the criminals and always wanting to make sure they get their rights. How about the rights of the company they screwed by their actions? Just because they are a big company doesn't mean that it's ok to have their property and rights trampled on. I know if my bandwidth was being choked because some jerk uncapped his modem I would want to have him prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Why should I pay the same price as them to have less service because they cheated the company.
| |
|  |  |  | |
Re: Successful prosecution?said by Sikki: First off the losers who uncapped their modems did so KNOWING it was against the TOS. Whether they knew it was against the law or not is up for debate.
Whether or not it IS against the law or not is up for debate. So far I haven't seen an article which gives chapter and verse of what they were charged and indicted with. It appears to me that they modified their OWN equipment, which means that a whole host of computer crime laws wouldn't apply. As for the TOS -- that's a contract dispute. It should be handled in civil court. No equipment confiscation, no felony charges, none of that crap. quote:
However knowing that what they were doing was wrong should have been the first clue that their actions COULD lead them to further trouble.
Some broadband companies have been accused of deliberately providing LESS bandwidth than they promised. Is it OK to send the FBI after them to confiscate all their equipment? | |
|  |  |  |  Sikki join:2000-09-19 Moosup, CT |
Sikki
Member
2002-Nov-22 3:48 pm
Re: Successful prosecution?quote:
However knowing that what they were doing was wrong should have been the first clue that their actions COULD lead them to further trouble.
Some broadband companies have been accused of deliberately providing LESS bandwidth than they promised. Is it OK to send the FBI after them to confiscate all their equipment? [/QUOTE] If that can be proven somehow I would have no problem with that. I do have a problem with at least one of those who got caught saying he should have only had his connection stopped. It seems to be the way of the world now-a-days that knowing I did something wrong I should just be slapped on the wrist and be told "I'm a naughty boy and I shouldn't do it again". What happened to taking responsibility for your actions? They did something they knew they weren't supposed to and now want everyone to feel sorry for them? I hope they lose all their equipment and do some jail time. That's just me...your thoughts and opinions may differ. | |
|
 |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finally MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO |
to russotto
Actually, download and upload speeds as well as alterations to owned equipment were not covered in Buckeye's TOS at the time. Altering Buckeye routers (not modems)was expressly included in the TOS, Buckeye-owned cable modems was implied by the same clause, but I doubt they actually did that. They are purely trying to nail them on theft of service, not on any TOS violations of any sort (though that would be a civil matter anyway). | |
|
 JakCrow join:2001-12-06 Palo Alto, CA |
I hope their lawyers know.......that cable internet services are not covered under CATV theft of service laws and that this is not a computer crime. These cases should get thrown out unless Buckeye wants to file civil suits against these people. Buckeye has gone too far with what little authority they're supposed to have and they should be smacked down for abusing the system. If these cases actually make it to court, the entire cable internet industry better be regulated the very next day. | |
|  |  | |
toledon
Anon
2002-Nov-21 9:27 pm
Re: I hope their lawyers know....Unfortionatly in Ohio, the way the law is written, Any access to a network or computer system beyond expressed or implied intent is against the law. You could basically write a web site that says "You are violating the law and I am going to procecute you!" and that would be enough to imply hacking. | |
|
 Jaime Premium Member join:2001-06-03 Huntington Beach, CA |
Jaime
Premium Member
2002-Nov-21 6:48 pm
Oh pleasesaid by article: John Weglian, chief of the special units division of the prosecutors office, offers no apologies for Buckeye's unusually harsh treatment of the uncappers. "Cyber crime is potentially very damaging to society.."
Yah, there's a lot of serious shit that can happen when a few uncappers increase their bandwidth, hey maybe next these uncappers will h4x0r the local police departments servers. Just another story of how big business can manipulate the government in order for them to get their dirty work done for them. | |
|  |  | |
Kaltes
Anon
2002-Nov-21 7:12 pm
Re: Oh pleaseA year in prison for 1 person costs the taxpayers an average of roughly $12,000, not to mention irreparably damaging the lives of the persons involved.
Why are the American people dedicating valuable police and correctional resources to scare people solely to improve the profits of a company?
If there ever was a claim to be made for cruel and unusual punishment for a penalty that is disproportionate to the crime, this would be it. Even a day in jail is too much considering all these people did was slightly inconvenience the company as well as their fellow subscribers. I think what they did was wrong, but no more wrong than the stupid people driving in Los Angeles (where I live) who ruin traffic by driving 20mph down main artery streets.
This is not even 'cyber crime' or whatever, and the damage to society only occurs when A LOT of people do it, and even then the damage is purely economic and very insignificant compared to the kind of things John Weglian can do if he decided to cheat consumers and investors. What would happen to John if he did that? Maybe nothing, maybe a few months / years at a nice country-club style facility at the worst.
This is just an utter perversion of democracy and justice. | |
|  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleaseI hate to burst your bubble, but stealing is stealing. | |
|  |  |  |  | |
Sean--
Anon
2002-Nov-21 8:49 pm
Re: Oh pleaseWhat was stolen? Some electrons? Prove it. | |
|  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleasequote: What was stolen? Some electrons?
No, services were stolen. It's like jumping the turnstile to ride free on the subway. quote:
Prove it.
How did they prove that John Lee malvo was the sniper? His prints were on the gun. How do they prove they were stealing bandwidth? His modem was uncapped. | |
|  |  |  |  |  | 
|
Re: Oh pleasesaid by fifty nine:
No, services were stolen. It's like jumping the turnstile to ride free on the subway.
You're falling all over yourself with this faulty logic. Do you think jumping the turnstile on the subway should be punishable by a year in jail as well? Don't compare this to "turnstile jumping" in one post and turn around and suggest that it's an extremely severe offense in another one. [text was edited by author 2002-11-22 13:18:04] | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleasequote: You're falling all over yourself with this faulty logic. Do you think jumping the turnstile on the subway should be punishable by a year in jail as well?
In some cases, yes it can land you in jail for a year, especially if you do it repeatedly. I must admit that the turnstile jumping was a mild example. I'd liken modem uncapping to bank or credit card fraud. | |
|
 |  |  |  | Anon |
to fifty nine
If it's stealing then it should be treated as such. Slap them with a fine and disconnect their cable. But the FBI and a year in jail? That feels more than a little heavy-handed to me. | |
|  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleaseI agree that the FBI bit is a bit extreme. But if all people get is disconnection and a slap on the wrist they are going to think they are going to get off easy again and continue stealing from another service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh please"But if all people get is disconnection and a slap on the wrist they are going to think they are going to get off easy again and continue stealing from another service."
As a person who recieved that same slap on the wrist, I can tell you that I would never think of uncapping my modem again, I dont steel from my current provider and it didnt take me a year in jail to learn my lesson. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleasequote: As a person who recieved that same slap on the wrist, I can tell you that I would never think of uncapping my modem again, I dont steal from my current provider and it didnt take me a year in jail to learn my lesson.
Not everyone is as ethical as you are. Some people will steal until they are severely punished for their actions. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh please"Not everyone is as ethical as you are. Some people will steal until they are severely punished for their actions."
Well if there are repeat infractions than I agree there should be a severe penatly. However, due to the subjectivty of uncapping's consequences, how can we assign a uniform penalty to such a crime? In other words, if we cannot assess the damage that the crime has caused, how can we be sure that the punishement fits the crime? I dont think there is a way to prove a slap on the wrist is not efficent until a second offense is commited. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  ykrad join:2001-08-23 Petaluma, CA |
to fifty nine
The ISP has to take some heat here. The ONLY reason these subscribers uncapped their modems was because they could. Buckeye apparently didn't have the eye for security - or the mind for fixing the problem. So the just bust these abusers to send a message to everyone else. Obey our rules or be treated like a homicidal serial killer. Respect by fear - Buckeye cable Mafia. Why couldn't they just fix the problem and punish the subscribers ACCORDINGLY? You imply all ISPs are just as easy to cheat as Buckeye. When in truth Buckeye's problems seem far deeper than just a few network abusers. Apparently they are in need some knowledgeable network engineering people - people who can fix flaws before they become a problem; and don't let them escalate until they're losing umpteen amounts of money then go crying to the Feds screaming bloody murder. Oh please is right. This is so damn sad it makes me sick. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleaseHere are the simple facts that everyone likes to divert from. These guys knowingly did something illegal. When you do something illegal, and get caught, you pay the penalty (hopefully to the maximum possible). When you steal the bandwidth that I use, even the miserable little bit that they call broadband, I hope all the worst stuff happens to you. On the other hand (I don't know the laws reguarding this kind of violation to a T) I don't think there is any justification in seizing all the computer equipment and the fact that they thought about sizing the Xbox... BS! Original CDs... BS | |
|
 |  |  |  | |
to fifty nine
that's like saying someone who steals a pen from their work deserves the death penalty!!
Reece, Reece400@hotmail.com | |
|  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleaseNo, that's like saying that someone who is caught shoplifting should be sent to jail. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleasesaid by fifty nine: No, that's like saying that someone who is caught shoplifting should be sent to jail.
Which is still a completely illogical argument. Should a person who steals $500 worth of merchandise from a department store be sent to jail? Of course. Should a 10 year old kid who puts a Snickers bar in his pocket be sent away? I would hope not. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
TheDoctor
Anon
2002-Nov-21 10:55 pm
Re: Oh please> Which is still a completely illogical argument. Should a > person who steals $500 worth of merchandise from a > department store be sent to jail? Of course. Unless they are Winona Ryder  Seriously, uncapping a cable modem should be comparable to tampering with your electric meter, and I'm sure the penalty for that is not so stiff. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
to BIGHUSKER3
quote: Should a 10 year old kid who puts a Snickers bar in his pocket be sent away? I would hope not.
These guys didn't steal a snicker bar. They stole alot more than that. The main problem here is that people don't see this crime as a big deal when in fact it is. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  JakCrow join:2001-12-06 Palo Alto, CA |
Re: Oh pleaseThere was no crime committed. A possible violation of the TOS with the cable internet service, but the fact of the matter is CATV laws do not apply to cable internet services. This is a civil case between Buckeye and those customers -at best-. I suggest you talk to your city cable franchise board and ask them if they're regulating cable internet service. I talked to my city's franchise manager about this before. The answer is no and theft of service doesn't apply to it. In fact, cable companies pulling this kind of BS is pissing off the clued-in regulators, of which the ones in Toledo are not. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |
to fifty nine
People see at as a crime, just not an important one. There are way more important things for the FBI to invistigate rather than a 11 people who uncapped their modem. Now the everyone has to pay for the FBI work, the court costs, and if they get a public defender. Wouldn't it just be cheaper to cut their access off and save everyone the time?
Nah, let's waste everyone's money and time and send them to jail. They stole something that isn't physical and whose price changes daily. How can they prove that they each stole $11k worth of bandwidth unless they have access reports, and their operating costs for the times they were online? | |
|
 |  |  |  | |
to fifty nine
by your definition, stealing a piece of gum should be punished just as severely as someone stealing a nuclear missile.
Just because they are both thefts does not mean they both require the same punishment and that's what his statement was about. It is too cruel a punishment to ruin someone's life for something that was only a slight inconvenience to the company. | |
|  |  |  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleasequote: by your definition, stealing a piece of gum should be punished just as severely as someone stealing a nuclear missile.
No, my definition means that someone caught stealing my car should be given a fair trial then sent to prison, that's all. | |
|
 |  |  |  | |
to fifty nine
said by fifty nine: I hate to burst your bubble, but stealing is stealing.
There are different degrees of stealing. Obviously, stealing a $60,000 Mercedes is different than stealing a candy bar from the local supermarket. I don't think anyone is debating whether or not stealing bandwidth is wrong. Clearly, it is unfair to other customers as well as the ISP. But, most people are questioning whether it's worth it to pursue the matter any further. IMHO, they should terminate their service and be done with it. To make a big deal out of it is trivial, and nothing more than a company exerting their muscle over the customers. | |
|  |  |  |  |  ••••••••••• |  |  |  |  | |
copernicus to fifty nine
Anon
2002-Nov-21 10:22 pm
to fifty nine
Right. And lets agree with Taliban style limb removal for accused thieves. No-one's arguing whether its stealing or not, that's obvious. But excessive punishment and capitalist control of government is the real issue here. | |
|  |  |  |  |  •••
|  |  |  cmd82 join:2002-06-24 Winterville, NC |
to Kaltes
it is a CRIME and you deserve to do time...bet your uncapped...your a FuC*ing thief! | |
|  |  |  |  | |
Reece400
Anon
2002-Nov-21 9:25 pm
Re: Oh pleaseDude,, I don't even have cable, or a cable modem, unless i can uncap dialup, there's little chance of that being true... i personnaly think the slow speed is definatly worth not dealing with an evil cable corp. i buy my inet from a small local ISP,, the people there are friendly, and won't call the FBI if i do something that breaks the contract...
Reece, Reece400@hotmail.com | |
|  |  |  |  | |
anonyjerk to cmd82
Anon
2002-Nov-22 9:08 am
to cmd82
"it is a CRIME and you deserve to do time...bet your uncapped...your a FuC*ing thief!"
Oh, how very enlightening. The use of rhyme scheme! Please stop breathing my air. | |
|
 |  |  BG AR Premium Member join:2000-09-11 Stamford, CT |
to Kaltes
said by Kaltes: Why are the American people dedicating valuable police and correctional resources to scare people solely to improve the profits of a company?
The economy is in recession, they have to make sure companies have enough revenues...  | |
|  |  |  |  •••
|  |  ROCINANTEOriginal Member 007 Premium Member join:1999-06-29 Hartsdale, NY |
to Jaime
This thread is idiotic.
Did anyone read the article?
They stole an average of $11K worth of bandwidth. That's a felony, and these people should be punished as such.
Just because you can't afford or can't acquire something, doesn't mean you can steal it. It's not owed to you. | |
|  |  |  ••••••••••••••••••••••• |  |  | |
to Jaime
I don't think anything should have happened to these people. They PAID for their service, it's not like stealing cable. These companies just want more control over users, for a bigger profit. | |
|  |  | 
|
Re: Oh pleasequote: They PAID for their service, it's not like stealing cable.
So by your logic, if I went to a car dealer and paid for a Ford, should I be allowed to drive out with a Mercedes? [text was edited by author 2002-11-22 10:35:25] | |
|  |  |  | 
|
Eat ME, Eat Me !Eat Me is a Taliban-wannabe! As for the rest of you F#$%in' Fascists, your sophomoric comprehension of justice and the American legal system clearly indicates there is not a single paralegal among you!!!
Fortunately there are several educated participants in this forum (Thank you: JakCrow, Marigolds, Sedated).
FYI -- There appears to be a dearth of information in this thread regarding the capacity of various digital subscriber and optical carrier circuits.
DS-0 = 64 kbps DS-1 = 1.544 Mbps (T1) DS-3 = 45 Mbps (T3) OC-1 = 51.84 Mbps OC-3 = 155 Mbps
[text was edited by author 2002-11-26 03:43:48] | |
|
 |  | |
Uhane to Jaime
Anon
2002-Nov-22 11:23 am
to Jaime
After Checking Buckeye Cablesystem's website, you will see that they offer 1 mb down , with 128kb up. Assuming that what he stole was upstream bandwidth, I can see how they arrived at thier $250k figure much easier. Upstream always costs more. But how do they determine a cost on a service they dont offer? Maybe I missed it on their site, but I saw no priceing structure for higher upstreams, only business pricing for emails and static ips. At my last job we were only paying $400 a month for a full T1 up and down, and a 16 channel SDSL multiplex unit only cost that same ISP $16000 to install it for the building we were in. And no I didn't live in a major metro area, just a medium to small town. Maybe Buckeye Cablesystems are getting screwed on their bandwidth. Yes the article stated that "claims his broadband connection was incapable of achieving speeds higher than 128kbps down", but it seems to me a simple mistype. As for the 100mb person.. while Buckeye Cablesystems advertise Fiber cable connections, it is a rarity that this is pulled to the home. Most are to the road if not the CO only, and while fiber is cappable of 100mb, the coax to the home and the modem itself are not. Did they steal? Yes. Should they be punished? Yes. Jail? No. Take all their equip? No. Service termination and a big fine? Yeah I would say that fits the crime. Most people don't get jail time for assaulting another human being (which i do believe is wrong). | |
|  |  | |
to Jaime
There is a lot of doubt about the legallity of uncapping. The truth is there is no law against it. In march the FCC ruled that cablemodem service is an interstate information service and does not contain a telecomunications component. As such, only information service laws apply. There are currently no information service laws that apply to information services that are not 900 services, or Pay per minute with regard to theft of service.
In this particular case the Qos in the area was advertised as 1024/128 but due to line condtitions was 128/6. Even E-mail would time out.
None of the people I have talked to signed a TOS, or RSA.
And regardless of where all the above puts you. Ask your self this. Through what legal means can a service provider obtain evidence to be used against you? You are going to say buy monitoring your bandwidth.... But alas unless you have given them permission to do so, that would be a violation of the same law they are attempting to use against these 9.
You will also find that in most TOS an ISP must notify you if any subpoena's are being served that would require them to share your information. Of course as soon as you know you are under investigation you would stop.
Even if you think everyone involved should rot in prison for the rest of their lives. Remember how they got there. 23 warrants were issued, 17 were served, 9 were indicted. It is amazing what friends and favors will do for those who have them.
8 computers and the livelihood of not only the accused, but his room mates, employees, and clients were taken. Decide if you would think it fair if your co-worker robbed a 7-11 on his lunch hour if they took the entire offices income for the next 6 months.
Lastly. the charge is Acess beyond the scope of the express or implied consent of, the owner of the computer, computer system, [or] computer network. Whoever violates this section is guilty of unauthorized use of computer OR TELECOMMUNICATION property, a felony of the fifth degree.
So any of you who play solitare at work with out your boss's permission is guilty of this same crime.
Any of you who try and guess the password on the computer's at the best buy are also guilty.
And Because of the Legal Definition of a computer in the STATE of OHIO (These are not Federal Charges Mind you) Any electronic device that performs calculations and displays the out put is a computer. If you can name a device that uses electricity that doesn't meed this definition let me know. Because every time your child sits down on the Horse at the meijer and doesn't put in a penny, you are committing a felony in the STATE of OHIO.
This has turned in to more of a rant than I intented, however I think a lot of you missed alot of the points made in this article. | |
|  |  JakCrow join:2001-12-06 Palo Alto, CA |
to Jaime
Geezus people. I'll say it again: CATV laws do not apply to cable internet services. People can go off on how these people stole services and committed federal crimes and blah blah blah, but that's simply not the case. Cable internet service is unregulated, there are no regulatory laws that can be applied, plain and simple. Using "computer crime" laws on this matter would hold little water since the only activity required was modem hacks to equipment in these users' premises, and they could have very well been their own modems. This is a matter of the cable company manipulating the law and ignorant law enforcement officials into doing what the cable company wants, without any legal basis. Buckeye doesn't even have an appropriate user agreement to point to. It would appear that what Buckeye is doing is the illegal activity in this matter.
Ask your local franchise managers about cable internet services. I'm sure they would be very interested in knowing that cable companies are trying to use regulated laws with their internet services and wonder why they're not getting any franchise fees or regulatory control over the services. | |
|  |  |  •••••••••••• |  |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finally MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO |
to Jaime
Sure, I happen to have the email I sent them a long time ago right here along with their terse response: Return-Path: FCCTSR05@fcc.gov Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (gatekeeper2.fcc.gov [192.104.54.4]) by [removed] (8.9.3/UW7.1.1) with ESMTP id IAA20348 for [removed]; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:26:37 -0500 (CDT) Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id JAA12022; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:18:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from unknown(165.135.237.22) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V5.5) id xma011982; Tue, 11 Jun 02 09:18:36 -0400 Received: from ROUTE_A-Message_Server by fcc.gov with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:18:36 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:18:24 -0400 From: "FCCTSR05" To: [removed] Subject: Re: How much notice is required to change service rates? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Status: RO
»www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cabl ··· 201.html
»www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/com ··· ain.html
>>> [my email address removed]> 05/12/02 02:54PM >>> Since after ATT v City of Portland, cable broadband providers are regulated as telecommunications service providers, how much notice is required by a cable modem service provider for the changing of pricing schemes? If I remember right, common carriers must provider 120 days notice; but since cable broadband providers are not common carriers (?) they would not have such restrictions. I ask this because my current Acceptable Use Policy for my cable internet provider is tied into the Terms of Service. The AUP contains a clause that allows the changing of service provided by the changing of advertising (i.e. service will be capped at the current advertise speed rates) and hence service was recently changed through the notice of changed advertising. Additionally, fees for service were increased with 10 days notice. The provider for this service is Mediacom and the service is mchsi. [my name and contact info removed]
If you follow the first link, it will lead right to the FCC ruling that makes cable modem services not a telecommunications service. The only other "information service" in existance is 900 numbers if you want an idea of just how much regulatory authority the FCC has taken over cable modems. i.e. they have authority but there are essentially no legal constraints other than obscenity laws. The second link spells out when the FCC will get involved with a cable company. Cable modems are not on that page at all. | |
|  |  |  | |
Re: Oh pleaseHere is what I read off of the link you gave:
"the FCC concluded that cable modem service is properly classified as an interstate information service and is therefore subject to FCC jurisdiction" | |
|
 |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finally MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO |
to Jaime
Then you didn't read the rest of the link, where they said it is not a telecommunications service. By classifying it as an interstate information service, the FCC made it subject to only their jurisdiction. In order to have regulatory authority, there must be a law that gives that regulatory authority (which is different from jurisdiction). The only other interestate information services are 900 numbers, over which the FCC has no regulatory authority other than obscenity clauses. That is also the extent of FCC regulatory authority over cable modem services (and in fact means that cable modem ISPs provide an information service, not telecommunications bandwidth). That also means that cable internet does not fall under 47 U.S.C. S 251(a)(1). | |
|  |  | |
Brief thoughts to Jaime
Anon
2003-Jan-13 9:13 pm
to Jaime
For 23 people to have "stolen" $11,000 worth of service per person each person would have to constantly use all of their 2.5 MB per second of bandwidth for a total of 2400 days which by the way would mean that they either received a total of over 600,000 GB of information or sent around 80,000 GB of information which even if only a small percent of it were kept by the people who uncapped their modems, would have filled thousands of average hard drives. So unless they were downloading it and deleting all of information at the same speed that they were getting it, this would be impossible to steal that much bandwidth in less than 7 years, and I forgot to include the fact that 40% of the bandwidth that the people who had achieved 2.5 MB per second had was bandwidth that they were actually paying for, so it would really take a lot longer than that to steal the total of $11,000. so the "guesstimate" that was made in order to get the FBI involved could not have possibly been off by more than $10,000 per person or somewhere around there. unless of course the cost for the slight inconvenience to the thousands of others with the service is valued at a few hundred dollars an hour. but since the majority of people don't use all of their legal bandwidth all of the time, there would be no inconvenience, because they would be using untapped bandwidth that would be left unused anyway, which isn't a bad thing because just because it is not being used doesn't mean it is being wasted in this case. that is assuming that buckeye cable can actually support all of their customers at the same time, which is probably an unrealistic assumption. In spite of this I still support some reasonable punishment for the offenders, such as a fine and disconnected service. But i'm not a proffesional in any area of law or communications so I can't be sure if I'm right. | |
|
 IanR join:2001-03-22 Fort Mill, SC |
IanR
Member
2002-Nov-21 7:01 pm
let me get this straightSo it IS OK for a Cable Internet Provider to ask for Payment, monthly, for speeds down to 128 and they are innocent of any crime.
However, as soon as a customer occasionally manages to squeeze extra speed out of a download it IS a Felony Crime.
How can you have one w/o the other also being a crime?
i.e. I the provide demand XX dollars per month and in reurn for this "consideration" I do not guarantee any speed. Hoever if you the use manage to cause download Speeds to exceed my posted Max it is a Felony crime. I though any contract had to work 2 ways. | |
|  |  •••••••••••••••• |  JAJ1138Rev. John Premium Member join:2001-04-18 RiverAcheron |
JAJ1138
Premium Member
2002-Nov-21 7:01 pm
Pure stupidity!quote: One of several defendants we spoke to places his estimated lost income and hardware at over half a million dollars.
This guy lost that much... Seems like a lot to lose just to get some extra bandwidth. A felony is a bit much! It's not like they hurt anyone in the process. But they should be punished! I guess they just want to make an example out of them. | |
|  |  •••• |  | |
Joke....Buckeye is obviously too incompitent to plug these security flawes in their cable modems. Maybe if they were fixing the actual bug instead of going after the people exploiting it they would have a lot more success. OH WAIT, i forgot most cable companies won't spend a f*cking dime to upgrade/fix any problems w/their service, that's my bad. That's why when you buy cable and you're surfing at 1.5-3mbps for the first month you're happy, then it goes down to 128.00001kbps. Read the little black text when you sign up that states "up to 1.5-3mbps" but if you're hitting atleast 128kbps, you can't drop the service without paying a staggering $200 termination fee. It's all bullsh*t and they should make laws against such deceptive practices. | |
|  |  •••••••• | 
|
Shamayim
Premium Member
2002-Nov-21 7:22 pm
Next time Buckeye callsthe FBI should tell them "Stop wasting our time." "F.B.I. Officials Say Some Agents Lack a Focus on Terror" (NYTimes article ) No sh*t! FBI squanders their manpower arresting cable customers instead of hunting down Muslim extremists on our soil who threaten our very existence! Buckeye Cable should be busted for diverting FBI resources away from this critical mission if you ask me. » www.nytimes.com/2002/11/ ··· r=GOOGLE | |
|  |  | |
Re: Next time Buckeye callsgood thing no one asked you then.
"muslim extremists that threaten our very existence!" what a load of shit. with security the way it is now, no one's threatened hardly at all. "very existance," aren't you just the chief big boy philosopher now?
"diverting FBI resources" jesus christ, can you even define prioritization? trust me, if we were being invaded, there wouldn't be many cybercrime arrests at all. | |
|
 phyre join:2002-04-15 Pineville, LA |
phyre
Member
2002-Nov-21 7:25 pm
What if......the people uncapping their modems actually own the modem? They have the right to do whatever they want to the modems correct? The cable ISP should be smart enough to "cut them off at the pass" instead of blaming their ignorance on the customer.
Phyre | |
|  | |
Good use of the taxpayer's moneyThis is the same FBI that just got vast new powers under the "Homeland Security" act? We are in serious trouble. | |
|  |  | |
Re: Good use of the taxpayer's moneyI agree!Big Brother has commeth!!!!!! | |
|
 61999674 (banned)Gotta Do What Ya Gotta Do join:2000-09-02 Here |
61999674 (banned)
Member
2002-Nov-21 7:32 pm
Theft of ServiceWhen you sign up the TOS states you get UP TO so many B/S, you don't like this ?? don't sign up with them and get another provider, uncapping is theft of service that others with higher speeds pay for, this is NO different than cracking your Electric or Gas meter to get more product than you pay for(do that and see what happens).... | |
|  |  •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |  IanR join:2001-03-22 Fort Mill, SC |
IanR
Member
2002-Nov-21 7:44 pm
A monopolyThe Cable Internet Provider is ONLY able to get away with a TOS which allows them total discretion to give you abissmal speeds because they have a Monopoly down that channel and there is no governing body to ensure they give minimal service. So to a great extent the customer has no other choice. If you get natural gas to house and as a normal feature the pressure fell back to the point were you could NOT cook you would have a Right for compensation against the Provider. However the Cable Internet Provider can give abissmal speeds and yet the "contract" says that's all legal and fine and dandy and you have no right to complain or request compensation. How can this be legally acceptable? | |
|  |  jekler join:2000-11-23 Cincinnati, OH |
jekler
Member
2002-Nov-28 6:18 pm
Re: A monopolyIt's legally acceptable because internet service isn't yet considered a necessity. Regulation is sure to come, but right now the internet is on-par with a gaming console. they're not required to make any more garauntees about your service than Nintendo is about how much fun a game is going to be. It'll probably be 3-5 years before we see much regulation, but right now the internet is in a largely developmental stage. The internet itself is barely reliable. It's hard to regulate a level of service requirement when that speed is highly dependent on the servers of the web sites and services you're visiting. I mean how can your ISP garauntee a level of service if the vast majority (99.9%+) of the internet consists of computers not directly under their control?
Just my thoughts on the subject, Jekler | |
|  |  |  | |
Re: A monopolyIf we are fortunate we will NEVER see such regulation -- just more competition.
Regulation is usually accompanied by taxes, a ton of inane legislation written by people who know less-than-nothing about the technology, as well as all sorts of other undesirable restrictions.
(They know "less-than-nothing" because what they think they know is generally wrong.) | |
|
 panth1The Coyote join:2000-12-11 Port Saint Lucie, FL |
panth1
Member
2002-Nov-21 7:50 pm
No fair.. I want in too.I can't wait till I can afford to buy a cable system. Then I can screw over all my customers. Watch the feds waste taxpayer money and hire incompetent employees.
Then I just might go buy a hockey team and maybe a few golf courses. | |
|  DaveDudeNo Fear join:1999-09-01 New Jersey
|
Really Dumb companyInstead of spending thousands of dollars, and wasting time, and people lives. Why not just charge them for what they stole. Duh? They should just say you stole X. Now pay for it, or we will fill a suit?
So instead of spending 50$ for each incident, they would rather spend thousands, and show what morons they are.
I wonder what would happen if Winnona Ryder did it ? | |
|  BrushedToothRemember To Shop Smart Shop S Mart join:2001-02-12 Westerville, OH |
Thats my ISP!!!I sure am glad I didn't get involved in the uncapping, with my Buckeye Cable account. Toledo Police do something about this, but nothing about car breakins, common Toledo. | |
|  newviewEx .. Ex .. Exactly Premium Member join:2001-10-01 Parsonsburg, MD |
newview
Premium Member
2002-Nov-21 8:01 pm
These victims need a defense fund.As a Comcast subscriber, formerly with @home, I can well understand the frustration with what now passes for broadband in this country. I can also understand how someone who may not fully comprehend their actions in uncapping their modem and breaking the AUP/TOS of their ISP may do so in an attempt to "get back" at the ISP.
But this is ridiculous.
If a defense fund would be set up for these "criminals", I'd be one of the first to donate. I would only ask that I be allowed to indicate what ISP I have, and why I'm donating. | |
|  |  •••••••••••••••••••••••• |  | |
Success? Idiots?I wonder how Buckeye is doing business-wise considering this it the third big announcement they have done about going to rediculous lengths to get at people uncapping their modems. If this sort of thing gets out I am sure more than a few people would be pissed at the way they are handling things. Break our TOS? Get your account locked? No way. We get you arrested and take your stuff.
Can anybody local pass some info on how Buckeye is handling their business? | |
|  | |
Customer Service.I can't imagine that this has helped subscribership.
I would pay the termination fees, just to make sure I (or my family) was not the next "example".
Here is a transcrip in jail: Bad Guy1: "What are you in for?" Bad Guy2: "Arson, What are you in for?" Bad Guy1: "Armed robbery, What about you new guy?" New Guy: "Cable Internet theft" Bad Guy1: "Not bad...Stealing cable boxes." New Guy: "No, I think you misunderstood, I used too much bandwidth." Bad Guy1 & Bad Guy2: (looking at each other confused) "What? . . . Oh I get it . . . Haaaa Haaa Haaa (laughing ass off). Next day Bad Guy1 & Bad Guy2 are let loose to make room for New Guy and his friends. | |
|  | |
Finally, A Company That Understands A Law!You know, people who say that this company went overboard in getting the FBI involved really do not have a sense of the scope of justice. After all, it is clearly shown that the people arrested and indicted were committing acts that are against federal law. They should definitely be punished for it, and in such a way that they NEVER commit the crime again.
Often, cable companies are far too lenient with customers who commit such crimes. They say "Well, your account is gone." The criminal simply says "Nah-nah. I'll just sign with someone else or get DSL." There's no sticking point to show why they should not commit the crime, no stick to punish the offender.
Now people complain because the full brunt of the law has been brought to bear. If you sell illegal drugs, you go to jail. If you murder someone, you go to jail. If you steal bread, even if to feed your starving family, you go to jail. If you hack a bank and transfer money to your accounts or other, you go to jail. But if someone breaks a law - an actual law - about uncapping cable modems, that shouldn't be punishable by jail-time? Even when it's a felony? Even when the guilty KNEW they were breaking it? Pah.
I hope these people get exactly what they deserve - punishment. They are like any other criminal, be they murderer, hacker, thief or jaywalker. If you violate the law, expect the law to come against you. We are a nation that exists under rule of law.
The defendents do not have my sympathy. | |
|  |  •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |  jerho join:2000-07-06 Salix, IA |
jerho
Member
2002-Nov-21 8:28 pm
How do I uncapwhen I am getting under 100k from my 512k connection that I am paying $60 a month for how can I uncap and get what I pay for. OH! thats right I'm not guaranteed that speed only that I will get billed for it. Why doesnt the law work the other way if you dont't get what you pay for call the FBI and take the isp's computers. With the republican party in charge of our country it will only get worse | |
|  |  ••• |  | |
That's what happens...when companies cap their service from the modem and not the source. I'm sure there are many users out there very happy and proud of the speeds they can obtain by screwing around with their equipment. But it all comes down to one thing. When you steal bandwidth, we are all paying for your dishonesty. Nothing is free in this world. Someone has to pay for it. Even that little plastic toy that kids think is free in their cereal adds one cent to the cost of the product. | |
|  |  •••••••••••••••••••••
|  | |
|
|